alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Alfonso EDWARDS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-2539

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed December 14, 2018

Alfonso Edwards, Trenton, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM

Alfonso Edwards appeals the order summarily denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Edwards timely filed his postconviction motion, raising two claims for relief. His first claim alleged that a scoresheet error rendered his plea involuntary. The postconviction court failed to rule on this claim, which warrants a remand for the court to address that claim. *See* *Purse v. State*, 185 So.3d 627, 627 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016).

*999In his second claim, Edwards asserted ineffective assistance of counsel in that his trial counsel did not discover the scoresheet error prior to the entry of his plea. Edwards argued that, as a result of this oversight, he experienced a harsher sentence than was legally required. The postconviction court properly found this claim to be facially insufficient because Edwards failed to allege that he would not have entered his plea but for counsel's error. Although this claim is facially insufficient, Edwards should be given notice and an opportunity to correct the deficiency within a specified time consistent with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(f), provided he can do so in good faith. *See* *Spera v. State*, 971 So.2d 754, 761 (Fla. 2007) ; *see also* *Boule v. State*, 86 So.3d 1185, 1186 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012).

Accordingly, we reverse the summary denial, and remand for the postconviction court to consider claim one and to strike claim two with leave to amend.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

EVANDER, EDWARDS, and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 11.1

Exhibit 11.1 - Computation of Earnings per Share


                                                              September 30, 2005
        Basic:

        Net Income                                                    ($719,121)
                                                                      ==========

        Average shares:
             Average shares outstanding                               89,242,284
                                                                      ==========

        Net income per common share, basic                               ($0.01)
                                                                         =======


        Diluted:

        Net Income                                                    ($719,121)
                                                                      ==========

        Average shares:
             Average shares outstanding                              100,633,784
                                                                     ===========

        Net income per common share, basic                               ($0.01)
                                                                         =======
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-60625

CHRIS W. BEGGERLY; JAMES R. BEGGERLY; CLARK M. BEGGERLY; VELMA B. GARNER; SUZANNE REED; DAVID REED, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Southern District of Mississippi

August 4, 1998 ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE UNITED STATES Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, EMILO M. GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
This matter is on remand from the Supreme Court, United States v. Beggerly , 118 S.Ct. 1862 (1998), wh ich reversed the decision of this court reported at 114 F.3d 484 (5th Cir. 1997). In accordance with the Supreme Court’s mandate, the judgment of the district court dismissing the Beggerlys’ complaint with prejudice
f or lack of jurisdiction and denying all other relief sought is hereby AFFIRME D2

in all respects.
Troy DAVENPORT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2552

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[December 6, 2018]

Troy Davenport, South Bay, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

Ciklin, Levine and Conner, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-3141
CLINT A. RAMSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INCORPORATED;CENTRAL ATLANTIC TOYOTA DISTRIBUTORS, INCORPORATED; ROBERT SKELTON; RANDY PFLUGHAUPT; STEVE NIVEN, JR., Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA94-1552-CCB) Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: July 30, 1996 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Clint A. Ramsey, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Jeffrey Magid, WHITEFORD, TAYLOR & PRESTON, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Defendants in an employment discrimination suit. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinionand find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Ramsey v. Toyota Motor Sales , No. CA-94-1552-CCB (D. Md. Nov. 7, 1995). Additionally, we deny the Appellees' motion to strike the Appellant's memorandum in opposition to Appellees' informal brief. We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT31.1





SECTION
      302 CERTIFICATION





I,
      Daniel T. MacInnis, certify
      that:





1.
      I have reviewed thisamendedannual
      report on Form 20-F/A-2of
      MAG Silver Corp.;





2.
      Based on my knowledge, this report
      does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
      material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
      circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
      to the period covered by this report;





3.
      Based on my knowledge, the financial
      statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly
      present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
      and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this
      report;





4.
      The company’s other certifying officerand
      I are responsible for establishing
      and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange
      Act
      Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:





(a)
      Designed such disclosure controls
      and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
      under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
      company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
      within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report
      is
      being prepared;





(c)
      Evaluated the effectiveness of the
      company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
      conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,
      as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
      and





(d)
      Disclosed in this report any change
      in the company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
      the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
      reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control over
      financial reporting; and





5.
      The company’s other certifying officerand
      I have disclosed, based on our most
      recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s
      auditors and the audit committee of the company’s board of directors (or persons
      performing the equivalent functions):





(a)
      All significant deficiencies and
      material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
      financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
      company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
      information; and





(b)
      Any fraud, whether or not material,
      that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in
      the
      company’s internal control over financial reporting.





Date:January
      14, 2008


/s/
“Daniel
      T. MacInnis”


Daniel
      T.
      MacInnis


Chief
      Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5810 Engrossed in House (EH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5810

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To amend the United States Cotton Futures Act to exclude certain cotton 
            futures contracts from coverage under such Act.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXCLUDING CERTAIN COTTON FUTURES CONTRACTS FROM COVERAGE 
              UNDER UNITED STATES COTTON FUTURES ACT.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (c)(1) of the United States Cotton 
Futures Act (7 U.S.C. 15B(c)(1)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``except that any cotton futures contract'' 
        and inserting the following: ``except that--
                    ``(A) any cotton futures contract''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
                    ``(B) any cotton futures contract that permits 
                tender of cotton grown outside of the United States is 
                excluded from the coverage of this paragraph and 
                section to the extent that the cotton grown outside of 
                the United States is tendered for delivery under the 
                cotton futures contract.''.
    (b) Application.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply 
with respect to cotton futures contracts entered into on or after the 
date of the enactment of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 10, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5810

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To amend the United States Cotton Futures Act to exclude certain cotton 
            futures contracts from coverage under such Act.
```
Jonathan JAYSON, Jennifer M. Dunsby and Jeffrey Jayson, Appellants, v. U.S. ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; Manufacturers & Traders Trust Company; Jordan M. Jayson and Matthew P. Iak, as Co-Personal Representatives of the Estate of Judith P. Jayson, Deceased, Appellees.

Case No. 2D17-3420

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 30, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**Exhibit31.1**

 

I, Nooruddin  S. Karsan, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Kenexa Corporation;

 

2. Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a. Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b. Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

c. Disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors:

 

a. All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

b. Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| *Date:  May 12, 2006* | */s/  Nooruddin S. Karsan* |                       |
|-----------------------|---------------------------------|----------------------------|
|                  |                            | *Nooruddin  S. Karsan*     |
|                  |                            | *Chief  Executive Officer* |
|                       |                                 |                            |  |

 

----
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

January 19, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

132174 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

TRACI WEBBER, Personal Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, Representative of the Estate of Justices Janie L. Webber, Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 132174 

 COA: 267582 

Oakland CC: 2003-055071-NM 

GEORGE HILBORN, and 

HILBORN & HILBORN, P.C., 

 Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 17, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral 

argument on whether to grant the application or take other peremptory action. MCR 

7.302(G)(1). At oral argument, the parties shall address whether the Court of Appeals 

erred in holding that plaintiff adequately stated a prima facie case of legal malpractice, in 

light of the observation in Charles Reinhart Co v Winiemko, 444 Mich 579, 585-586 

(1994), that “a plaintiff ‘must show that but for the attorney’s alleged malpractice, he 

would have been successful in the underlying suit;’” and, if so, whether it is necessary to 

remand this case to the trial court for a determination of whether further amendment of 

the complaint to allege proximate cause would be futile. The parties may file 

supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order, but they should avoid 

submitting a mere restatement of the arguments made in their application papers. 

l0116 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

January 19, 2007 

Clerk
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Annual Report of Columbia Bancorp (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Greg B. Spear, the
Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      1.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      2.    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and result of operations
            of the Company for the period certified.

Date:  March 13, 2006

/s/ GREG B. SPEAR
------------------------
Greg B. Spear
Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice-President
Gerald MCCANN, Appellant, v. CHARLOTTE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS/EMPLOYER'S MUTUAL, INC., Appellees.

No. 1D18-2118

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 14, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Floods

Filters

              - science_science(7)
              - products_data(3)
              - products_publications(25)
              - products_web_tools(2)
              - multimedia_image(13)
              - multimedia_image-141770(1)
              - multimedia_image-141771(12)
              - multimedia_slideshow(1)
              - multimedia_video(7)
              - multimedia_video-149195(4)
              - multimedia_video-149197(2)
              - multimedia_video-149198(1)
              - (-)news_news-149245(2)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - news_newsletters(1)
              - news_other_news(2)
              - connect_staff_profiles(2)
              - other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(1)
              - arizona(4)
              - arkansas(2)
              - california(5)
              - colorado(6)
              - connecticut(1)
              - delaware(1)
              - florida(3)
              - georgia(3)
              - guam(1)
              - hawaii(2)
              - idaho(2)
              - illinois(1)
              - indiana(3)
              - iowa(7)
              - kansas(1)
              - louisiana(1)
              - (-)maine(2)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - michigan(1)
              - minnesota(3)
              - missouri(5)
              - montana(2)
              - nebraska(2)
              - nevada(2)
              - new hampshire(2)
              - new jersey(2)
              - new mexico(2)
              - new york(2)
              - north carolina(3)
              - north dakota(4)
              - ohio(3)
              - oklahoma(4)
              - oregon(3)
              - pennsylvania(1)
              - puerto rico(1)
              - rhode island(1)
              - south carolina(5)
              - south dakota(7)
              - texas(12)
              - u.s. virgin islands(1)
              - utah(1)
              - vermont(1)
              - virginia(2)
              - washington(3)
              - west virginia(1)
              - wyoming(1)

## By Year

State News Release        December 20, 2023        USGS is determining extent of flooding in Maine caused by large coastal storm worsened by snowmelt

State News Release        March 1, 2018        USGS Deploys Storm-Tide Sensors in Advance of Nor’Easter
SCHEDULE B — PROMISSORY NOTE
  1.      Names:
  Investor:                                 Larry Powalisz, President
 K & L International Enterprises, Inc. 1
 375 State Road 436
 Casselberry, FL 32707
  Issuer/Affiliate:Robert Atwell, President
 Camelot Entertainment Group, Inc.
 8001 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 400
 Irvine, CA 92618
  2.     Promise to Pay.
  In consideration of the debt listed in the "Wrap Around Agreement" (incorporated herein by reference), permitting the Issuer to fulfill debt obligations due and owed to the Affiliate, the Investor agrees to purchase the debt due and owed the Affiliate from the Issuer for $200,000.00 (Two Hundred Thousand Dollars)
  3.      Principal Payment.
  Issuer will pay the principal in full on or before August 31, 2010 , together with any accrued interest. No interest shall accrue for the first 60 days from the date of this agreement. Outstanding principal will accrue interest at the rate of 15 % (fifteen percent) per annum.
  4.      Collection Costs.
  If Investor prevails in a lawsuit to collect on this note, Issuer will pay Investor's costs and lawyers' fees in an amount the court finds to be reasonable.
 
   
 
 5. Notices.
  All notices must be in writing. A notice may be delivered to Issuer or Investor at the address specified in Section I, above, or to a new address Issuer or Investor has designated in writing. A notice may be delivered:
  (1) in person
  (2) by certified mail, or
 
 (3) by overnight courier.
 
 6. Governing Law.
  This promissory note will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of Florida.
  7. Severability.
  If any court determines that any provision of this promissory note is invalid or unenforceable, any invalidity or unenforceability will affect only that provision and will not make any other provision of this agreement invalid or unenforceable and such provision shall be modified, amended, or limited only to the extent necessary to
render it valid and enforceable.
  Dated: August 3, 2009
  By:/s/ Larry Powalisz
 Larry Powalisz, President
 K & L International Enterprises, Inc.
 1375 State Road 436
 Casselberry, FL 32707
  By:/s/Robert Atwell
 Robert Atwell, President
 Camelot Entertainment Group, Inc.
 8001 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 400
 Irvine, CA 92618
**Exhibit 32.1**
   **SECTION
        1350 CERTIFICATION**
 **(Chief
        Executive Officer)**
 
 
 I,
        Robert
        M. Howe III, President and Chief Executive Officer of eTelcharge.com (the
        "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
        2002,
        18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:
 
 1.  The
        Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of eTelcharge for the year ended December 31,
        2007
        (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
        of
        the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.78m or 78o(d)); and
 
 2.  The
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of eTelcharge.
   /s/
                    Rob HoweDated:
                    June 3, 2008
                Robert
                    M. Howe IIIPresident
                    and Chief Executive Officer
  This
        certification is being furnished to the SEC with this Report pursuant to
        Section
        906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent
        required by such Act, be deemed filed by eTelcharge for purposes of Section
        18
        of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject
        to the
        liability of that section.
CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   I, Simon Ridgway, Chief Executive Officer of Radius Gold Inc. (the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:  1. This Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   Date:    May 14, 2012   /s/ Simon Ridgway ____________________ Simon Ridgway, Chief Executive Officer